COP30: How far has the Global Goal on Adaptation Progressed since COP29?

Last year in Baku, negotiators were confronted with an overwhelming task: more than 9,000 proposed indicators for tracking global adaptation progress. Countries remained divided over whether metrics should be global or national, and technical experts lacked concrete guidance. Water and sanitation though essential to climate resilience risked being overshadowed in the complexity.

One year later, the outcome of COP30 shows how far the process has advanced, while also underscoring how much work remains.

A More Coherent Indicator Framework

The most visible shift between COP29 and COP30 is the move from volume to coherence. After two years of expert work under the UAE–Belém Work Programme, countries now have a refined proposed set of 100 indicators, including:

• 10 dedicated water and sanitation indicators
• Clearer climate rationales linking each indicator to hazards and vulnerabilities
• Draft methodological notes and suggested disaggregation
• Documented integration across all thematic targets, with 54 percent of indicators outside the water target also referencing water

This marks a structural change: water is no longer a side element of adaptation, but a central enabler across sectors.

From Design to Implementation

Discussions at COP30 reflected a major shift in focus. Whereas COP29 was about defining what adaptation indicators could look like, COP30 centered on how the framework will be used in practice.

Key questions now include:

• How will indicators be integrated into national adaptation plans and NDCs?
• What monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) systems are needed?
• How can national statistical offices be supported to collect reliable data?
• What guidance and capacity building will countries need after COP30?
• How will indicators feed into the Baku Adaptation Roadmap and the broader UNFCCC architecture?

The transition from designing the framework to outlining its implementation marks the most significant year-on-year shift.

Water and Sanitation: From Visibility to Embedded Priority

One clear evolution is the strengthened position of water and sanitation within the GGA.

The proposed indicators now track:

• climate-induced water scarcity
• water quality and pollution levels
• water-use efficiency
• climate-resilient drinking water and sanitation services
• basin-level and transboundary adaptation planning
• the protection of vulnerable populations
• planned relocation due to water-related hazards

Compared with COP29, where much of the work focused on ensuring water issues remained visible, COP30 shows a consolidated and politically recognized foundation for water-related adaptation monitoring.

Alignment Through the Baku Adaptation Roadmap

Another major development at COP30 was the alignment of GGA implementation with the emerging Baku Adaptation Roadmap (BAR). The Roadmap is expected to structure post-COP30 work across:

• capacity-building
• MEL guidance
• technology and data support
• finance and means of implementation
• coordination among the Adaptation Committee, NWP, and LEG

This addresses a gap highlighted at COP29, where adaptation efforts appeared fragmented across bodies and mandates.

Finance: Progress, But Still Insufficient

Despite progress on technical aspects, COP30 underscored the ongoing challenge of adaptation finance. While the indicator framework is now more closely connected to means of implementation, the final COP30 decisions contained limited new financial commitments.

This mirrors concerns raised at COP29 and reinforces the need for sustained engagement in 2026 to ensure that countries have the resources to operationalize the framework.

Political Realities at COP30

The final plenary in Belém revealed a degree of political fragility. Several Latin American delegations stated they had insufficient time to review the adaptation text before its adoption. While the decision ultimately passed, this highlighted ongoing sensitivities around consensus-building. Observers also noted that broader COP30 outcomes offered modest commitments on adaptation and finance, increasing the importance of follow-up work after Belém.

How Far Have We Come — and What Comes Next?

Significant progress since COP29:

• 9,000 proposals → 100 structured indicators
• Water and sanitation fully integrated into the adaptation framework
• Stronger technical foundations and draft methodologies
• Recognition of water across the majority of adaptation targets
• A clearer implementation pathway through the Baku Adaptation Roadmap
• Increased focus on national systems, MEL, and statistical capacity

Key gaps that remain:

• Clearer adoption language for indicators
• Adequate adaptation finance
• Guidance and definitions for core adaptation concepts
• Capacity building for national data systems
• Continued political consensus and follow-up beyond COP30

Conclusion: A Turning Point, With More Work Ahead

From COP29 to COP30, the world has moved from conceptual uncertainty to a more structured approach for measuring adaptation progress. Water and sanitation once at risk of being sidelined now have a central, measurable presence within the GGA framework.

But COP30 also makes one thing clear: indicators alone do not build resilience. The next phase will be decisive. Countries will need support, guidance, and sustained momentum to turn this new framework into strengthened water and sanitation systems, healthier environments, and safer communities.

COP29 built the foundation. COP30 provided the tools. The work now shifts to making them matter on the ground.